Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21438 (AP)

P NEELIMA PRASAD v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/14377/2025 · 2026-02-10

Subba Reddy Satti

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010284272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 14377/2025 Between: 1. P NEELIMA PRASAD, W/O LATE MALLIKARJUNA PRASAD AGED 55 YEARS, D/O 4-159-21,1ST ROAD, GOKUL AYURVEDIC HOSPITAL, GEOGEPET, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PIU(PR) DIVISION, ANANTHAPURAMU ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PR, ANANTHAPURAMU. 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in withholding the payments of pending amounts of Rs.2,05,20,478 /- (Rupees Two Crore Five Lakhs Twenty Thousand Four 2 Hundred and Seventy Eight only) for the year 2022, even after finalizing the bills, payable to the petitioner in relation to the works I. Package No.APAM/ATP/Tadipatri/05 Consisting of 10 road works in Tadipatri constituency Est.Cost Rs.543.89 Lakhs of 1) Cuddapah R and B Road to Peddapolamada via Yerraguntapalli and Chinnapalli and reach 1 est.cost Rs.50 lakhs. 2) Igudur to Bugga-yadiki road via Bramhanapalli reach 1 est. Est.Cost Rs,57 lakhs 3) Alur to Uruchinthala via Alur Kona Darga reach lEst.cost Rs.30 lakhs 4) Vanganur to Kondepalli reach 1 est cost 30 lakhs 5) Tadipatri - Pathapalli R and B Road to C.B.Road via Challavaripalli and Jambulapadu reach lest.cost Rs.46.89 lakhs. 6) R and B Road to Hussainapuram Est cost Rs.60 lakhs 7) Therannapalli to Thimmapuram Est.cost 30 lakhs. 8) Gooty- Peddavadugur reach lest.cost Rs.150 lakhs. 9) Chinthalacheruvu to Kristipadu (via) Ravuludiki -Konduru reach 1 Est.Cost Rs.40 lakhs. and 10) Lakshumpalli to Mallenipalli reach 1 Est.Cost 23 lakhs. Agreement no. /2022-23, dated 22.07.2022sanctioned under Chief Engineer, PR Vijayawada, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents to forthwith consider releasing the amounts Rs.2,05,20,478 /- (Rupees Two Crore Five Lakhs Twenty Thousand Four Hundred and Seventy Eight only)payable to the petitioner herein, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DEVASRI ROSHAN KANCHARLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri Devasri Roshan Kancharla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat 3 Raj and Rural Development & Finance and Planning Department, for the respondents. 2. The above writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondents in withholding an amount of Rs.2,05,20,478/-, payable to the petitioner in relation to the works i.e., I Package No.APAM/ATP/Tadipatri/05, consisting of 10 road works in Tadipatri Constituency Est. Cost Rs.543.89 Lakhs of 1) Cuddapah R&B Road to Peddapolamada via Yerraguntapalli and Chinnapalli and reach 1 Est. cost Rs.50 lakhs; 2) Igudur to Bugga-yadiki road via bramhanapalli reach 1 Est. cost Rs.57 lakhs; 3) Alur to Uruchinthala via Alur Kona Darga reach 1 Est. Cost Rs.30 Lakhs; 4) Vanganur to Kondepalli reach 1 Est. Cost of Rs.30 Lakhs; 5) Tadipatri – Pathapalli R&B Road to C.B.Road via Challavaripalli and Jambulapadu reach 1 Est. Cost Rs.16.89 Lakhs; 6) R&B Road to Hussainapuram Est. Cost Rs.60 Lakhs; 7) Therannapalli to Thimmapuram Est. Cost Rs.30 Lakhs; 8) Gooty – Peddavaduguru reach 1 Est. Cost Rs.15 Lakhs; 9) Chinthalacheruvu to Kristipadu (via) Ravuludiki – Konduru reach 1 Est. Cost Rs.10 Lakhs and 10) Lakshumpalli to Mallenipalli reach 1 Est. Cost Rs.23 Lakhs, vide Agreement No…/2022-23 dated 22.07.2022. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner and the 3rd respondent entered into an agreement vide Agreement No…/2022-23 dated 22.07.2022 to execute the work. Thereafter, the petitioner executed the work. However, the respondents failed to release the amount. 4 4. The 2nd respondent filed a counter-affidavit. In para-5, it was stated as follows: “It is submitted that the 1st bill for an amount of Rs.2,05,20,478/- for the works executed by the petitioner including Government statutory recoveries and quality control recoveries and in which contractor is entitled for an amount of Rs.1,91,78,584/-.” 5. Thus, as seen from the counter-affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, there is no dispute regarding the execution of works and the petitioner’s entitlement for Rs.1,91,78,584/-. Since the amount payable is admitted and undisputed, the writ petition is maintainable. In M/s Utkal Highways Engineers and Contractors v. Chief General Manager & Ors1, it was held at Para No.8 as under: “Be that as it may, the High court has not dealt with the merits of the writ petition. Moreover, it is not an inviolable rule that no money claim can be adjudicated upon in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Non-payment of admitted dues, inter alia, may be considered an arbitrary action on the part of respondents and for claiming the same, a writ petition may lie. Further, throwing a writ petition on ground of availability of alternative remedy after 10 years, particularly, when parties have exchanged their affidavits, is not the correct course unless there are disputed questions of fact which by their very nature cannot be adjudicated upon without recording formal evidence”. 6. Given the facts and circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release an amount of Rs.1,91,78,584/- (Rupees One Crore Ninety One Lakhs Seventy Eight Thousand Five Hundred and 1 2025 SCC online SC 1400 5 Eighty Four only) payable to the petitioner regarding execution of the aforementioned work, within six (06) months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 11.02.2026 SNI 6 212 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 14377 OF 2025 Date: 11.02.2026 SNI